For most, what was missing was the confidence and conviction that they could properly reintegrate into their family and the workforce upon release. This was not surprising, given that many had repeatedly tried and failed, leading to a history of multiple offenses. For the majority, prison was not an uncharted path. From an early age, they had unsuccessfully navigated through the maze of correctional facilities leading to their present situation. Many had come from dysfunctional home environments with little or no family support, leading to a heavy reliance on negative peers to provide a sense of identity and belonging. The resulting lack of positive role models provided a distorted sense of values and justification of what would normally be regarded as negative behavior.

For others, prison provided a false sense of security, away from the stress and pressures of daily life. In the wry words of one TOC participant, "All our major needs such as housing, food and medical, even new glasses, are provided for." Many doubted their ability to survive financially without support from "easy money" gained from illicit activities and worried about their lack of willpower to withstand the myriad of external social pressures needed for sustainable change. Despite a desire to change, they knew their personal limitations and battled inner demons to overcome familiar temptations as their release date drew near.

Even for those determined to start afresh, they questioned their likelihood of finding "good" friends to lead a normal life. Despite the prospect of a secure job to meet their basic monetary needs, this was overshadowed by internal fears that they would be stigmatized and shunned by bosses, colleagues, family, and society, leading to loss of motivation to change and eventual relapse.

Some of these issues are discussed in detail in the following sections.

Stigmatization

The Yellow Ribbon Project,4 a community rehabilitation project targeted at helping ex-offenders reintegrate back into society, has done remarkably well in dealing with the more tangible issues ex-offenders face post-release such as finding a job. Many ex-inmates, however, still feel discriminated against by society due to their past prison record. Commonly described as "their second prison," this refers to their psychological and social imprisonment upon release with the "keys" held by the ex-offender's family, friends, neighbors, employers, colleagues, and the community at large. How much is this perception as opposed to reality? What is the extent of this stigmatization?

At Work

Work is an important component in the rehabilitative process for offenders. Gainful employment contributes to the lowering of the recidivism rate by boosting their self-esteem by being able to earn a living to support their families. While tremendous support is provided by the government to facilitate job placement for pre-release inmates, many unfortunately still choose to view the opportunity as discriminatory due to the blue collar, entry-level nature of the positions despite predefined promotion prospects depending on performance.

This faulty starting assumption affected their attitude toward the employer even before work had commenced. Coupled with significant insecurity and self-esteem issues beneath their tough exterior, any criticism of their work by their boss or colleagues was often interpreted as bias. In one situation, an ex-inmate employed by a car washing company accused the supervisor of prejudice when he was not allowed to perform cash-related tasks. It was only upon other new employees joining the company that he realized all "newbies" were treated in the same manner. While undoubtedly there were actual instances of discrimination, the ex-offender was also often at fault for a wrongful attitude or poor work performance.

Low starting pay was another common gripe. Instead of trying to understand the cause, such as a possible lack of experience or qualification, the automatic yet questionable assumption was that it was due to discrimination in view of their prison record. In one extreme case, as illustrated in the negative branch diagram depicted in Fig. 27-2, acceptance of a Singapore Government-assisted Prepare and Place (PNP) job and its accompanying low entry pay became the assumed root cause of every predicted future negative event in this inmate's life. Instead of being hailed as a helping hand, the PNP job was ironically perceived as exploitation and the central potential cause of reoffense and failure.

FIGURE 27-2 Negative Branch diagram.

At Home

Fear of stigmatization was by no means confined to the work environment. Many had a long history of estranged relationships with their family members because of their delinquent behavior. In almost every case, this was worsened by each side's tendency to see the worst, rather than the best, of the other due to unchecked and unchallenged erroneous assumptions formed purely from individual past experience, which did not allow for change. Even before release, many inmates were worried about the skepticism and perceived lack of support from family members in their attempts to start anew. Many complained about family members who would nag and call incessantly during the day or even "spy" on them to ensure they were not hanging around with bad company, despite their genuine efforts to change.

For this reason, many found it difficult to face family members upon release. Even though they had nowhere to stay, many were afraid to go home until they could prove themselves or feel of value to the household. In one case, an inmate refused to stay with his sister upon release despite her pleas for fear that his brother-in-law would "look down" on him. After doing the TOC Cloud and identifying possible faulty assumptions about his family, he took the courage to face them with his fears and was transformed when reassured of their love and concern for him despite his starting halting offer:"I have nothing to offer. All I can give is just a kiss." Two years later, this extended family unit is still intact.

Another reason for avoidance was the fear that family members would shun them or gossip about them. To avoid gossip, many tended to avoid family functions such as weddings and Chinese New Year celebrations, which creates huge inner conflict due to the importance of Asian filial piety, family ties, and kinship. Many secretly resumed illegal activities almost immediately upon release to earn extra money for the family in a desperate effort to prove their self-worth. Without the family's knowledge or consent, one broke curfew during parole supervision to earn extra money while another accompanied his friend on a drug run to meet household bills. Paradoxically, upon learning about the illegal activity, their families refused to believe the best intentions of their behavior, leading to a deeper spiral of mistrust between both parties.

Other family conflicts remained deadlocked for years due to an inability to identify and resolve the core problem. In an example illustrated in Fig. 27-3, an inmate was convinced that his mother hated him because she made no effort to reconcile with him for over 10 years. By simply reframing and reverbalizing his thoughts using the TOC Evaporating Cloud, he was stunned to realize that an alternative underlying need for his mother not wanting to reconcile with him may be due to "not wanting to be hurt again" rather than his longstanding dogged belief that she "hated him." From the immediately softened expression on his face and subsequent positive actions taken to reconcile upon release, it was apparent that a once hopeless situation had given way to optimism. The power of just a few words cannot be underestimated.

Negative Peer Pressure

Negative peer pressure is cited as one of the biggest obstacles to successful rehabilitation. For many offenders, their negative peers represent their de facto family, or brotherhood, especially when they have come from families with little or no parental support or supervision. As a result, there is a disproportionate amount of loyalty and "stickiness" in these relationships, many of which are formed during the impressionable teenage years that provide a sense of belonging, security, and self-esteem. Unless there is an alternative way to satisfy these underlying needs (e.g., reconciliation with family, success in work, or finding a new circle of friends), these relationships are almost impossible to wean.

I have been in conflict between me and my mum since 1999, the year which I went to Reformative Training Centre for rioting. Actually my mum had already warn me when I was sentence to Boy's Home in 1998. After I've been released with electronic tagging, I started to build a bridge toward my mum by going back to school but in the end, the bridge demolished. It goes same until now, when ever the bridge been build, it destroy by me. So last year, I started to build it once more, it goes the same. My fault is, I never keep my promises to her....

FIGURE 27-3 Cloud diagram.

On a very simplistic level, we can liken this to a child who, whenever he falls down, immediately cries for his mother. In the same manner, whenever the ex-inmate feels threatened in a stressful work environment, the tendency is to run toward the comfort zone of negative peers who provide both emotional and financial support. The core problem lies in the latter form of support rather than the former, which invariably in this group of peers is not easily delinked. Conditional to having this emotional security and acceptance, one needs to behave in a manner acceptable to the group. In more cases than not, this involves delinquent behavior to obtain "easy money," which, in a very twisted logic loop, brings about an even greater sense of acceptance, achievement, and self-worth from their peers.

Consider the following highlighted excerpt from Fig. 27-4 of a crudely constructed TOC Current Reality Tree (CRT) skeleton drilling down from why the author does not see the need to change. The only question asked at each level is "why?" Even though the logical links are somewhat flawed and incomplete, it is astonishing to see the level of honest self-reflection after a brief two-hour exercise bearing in mind his lower education level and limited verbalization ability. From a starting position of blame (highlighted undesirable effects [UDEs]), the core problem shifts to self. Notice the importance of the branch originating from his desire to "feel famous and recognized" or, put another way, to have a sense of identity, which is provided from his peers.

Importance of Face

Linked inexorably to these issues is the Asian intangible concept of "face," which is used in relation to honor, and its opposite, humiliation. Loss of face is linked to the fear that others may think badly of you, will not respect you, and will laugh and whisper about you behind your back. A similar term in Malay is "malu," which means social shame, the inner feeling of doing something wrong and letting others down. In Asian society, protecting against loss of face becomes so central an issue that it swamps the importance of other tangible issues at stake.

FIGURE 27-4 Current Reality Tree skeleton.

For inmates, the importance of face is even more pronounced due to their low self-esteem. With little to boast about except their negative achievements, the need to protect their honor and face becomes tantamount when threatened. Whether in prison, in the workplace, with friends or at home, humiliation is to be avoided at all costs, which often leads to seemingly irrational or illogical behavior. In order to save face, many feel that they have no choice but to make less than optimal decisions, which affects both their work and personal lives.

As an example, one inmate shared that he was "forced" to commit robbery because his best friend needed money for his mother's hospitalization bill. At the time, he felt he had no other choice. The irony was that it was not at his friend's request but his own need to feel "the man" and act as "big brother." Without even considering other alternatives such as government assistance for low-income families or consulting the hospital social worker, he automatically assumed the burden to meet his own misguided need to prove his loyalty.

In another incident, an inmate was arrested for vehicle theft and rioting after receiving an urgent call from a fellow gang member who was outnumbered and involved in a serious "showdown" with his enemies. With no money, he felt he had no choice but to steal a vehicle and go to save his friend. Based on this logic, he failed to see the justice behind his arrest and the reason for imprisonment was lost on him. In another rioting case, the inmate recounted that he had no choice but to fight because an enemy gang member had "stared at him." In order to protect his honor, he had to stare back and fight.

From these incidents, one can see the extreme measures taken to save face. To them, choice is not an option where face is concerned. Unless they are able to look forward and question their priorities of what is really important in their lives, everyday actions will remain impeded by their unvalidated need to preserve face at all cost, even at the expense of work and family.

What to Change to?

Self-Regulation

Based on the previous observations, though by no means exhaustive, a pattern is starting to emerge. If we draw a conclusion strictly according to these findings, then presumably the main reason why ex-inmates do not successfully reintegrate into society is due to lack of control over external influences, that is, discriminatory employers, lack of family support, negative peer pressure, prison life being too comfortable, and being forced by circumstances to commit the crime to protect their "face" and honor. If this hypothesis is correct, then it implies that the inmate is just a passive victim of circumstance.

The folly of this victim mentality is obvious. Undoubtedly, the role of the inmate supersedes any form of external influence. How we choose to think and what we choose to do is governed by self-will after deliberation on all external factors. The only way to improve our life is to take responsibility for our actions through self-regulation. As the old adage goes, if we can't change others, then we can only change ourselves. Using the TOC TP tools, the goal was to take them to the mirror and let them see their own reflection before deciding for themselves what makeover, if any, was required. Change must be prompted from within rather than dictated by others to be effective.

Why TOC?

Many people have asked what it was about TOC that led me to believe it could change deeply ingrained thinking patterns developed over a lifetime. How could we convince grown men of such tough demeanor to openly share personal problems, admit their personal shortcomings, and put them up for group scrutiny within an impossibly short contact time of 18 hours? What generic tool could meet the individual needs of 60 inmates with a plethora of different backgrounds and chronic conflicts?

To an observer, it seemed almost foolhardy for us to continue given our limited experience and intuition in the challenging prison environment. What was so special about TOC that gave us the confidence to carry on?

Three characteristics about TOC were pivotal to our decision:

1. TOC tools are Socratic.

From an early age, most inmates have been lectured on the right way to act, think, and behave by parents, teachers, social workers, counselors, and prison officers. As a result, like smokers, they have become numb to outside opinions, no matter how rational. TOC tools, however, provide them the freedom of choice to use their own words, expressions, and language to develop privately their own solutions to their problems. Once they understand the process, participants have free rein to express their own point of view within the parameters of a logic diagram without third-party interruption or distraction.

When these inmates, who are so used to not helping themselves, decide to buy in, then it is an enormous sense of accomplishment because they feel like they helped themselves. This empowerment facilitates ownership of the solution instead of having to be reminded constantly about the negative consequences of their actions. Within the setting of a correctional facility where inmates are largely constrained in the way that they act and behave, the importance of this sense of empowerment by unleashing their thinking processes cannot be underestimated. As one inmate put it, "You can control how I behave, but you cannot control my mind."

2. TOC tools cross all boundaries.

TOC tools are generic enough to use across different industries and applications but yet specific enough to meet each participant's needs irrespective of age, education, and culture. They provide a simple yet logical framework to check one's thought processes in the language and vocabulary with which one is familiar and comfortable. Figures 27-5 and 27-6 show the work of inmates in different languages.

3. TOC believes that everyone is basically good.

According to the TOC philosophy, bad actions result from an illogical or irrational choice of action to meet their underlying need. To many, this is an impossible statement to believe as we are conditioned to believe that bad people do bad things. This creates an enormous sense of self-blame and guilt when the offender finally accepts responsibility for his actions. Unless there is some way to make atonement for his actions, many ex-offenders carry the belief that they are bad which affects their subsequent behavior. Labeled by society, family, and self as worthless and hopeless, not surprisingly this often leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy.

FIGURE 27-5 Branch diagram in Chinese.

FIGURE 27-6 Branch diagram in Malay.

By using the TOC Evaporating Cloud, one is able to logically validate one's understanding of each situation and identify the erroneous assumption that has led to the wrongful action. Coupled with the self-correcting terminology of the tool, one learns to see the best in self and others through identifying the positive need underlying each action and thus avoiding preemptive and wrongful judgment.

Figures 27-7a and b illustrate a marital conflict. In order to have a happy marriage (common objective), I must prove my point (need). In order to prove my point (need), I must argue (want). Does proving a point lead to a happy marriage? Is arguing the only way to prove a point? We can rewrite this cloud using different wording: In order to have a happy marriage (common objective), I must ensure my spouse understands me (need). In order to ensure my spouse understands me (need), I must argue (want).

The difference in wording between "prove a point" and "ensure that my spouse understands me" is slight but the difference in meaning is enormous. The first is all about self, but the latter implies that the spouse's opinion matters. Other ways to increase understanding could be to write a letter or e-mail, or have a quiet chat.

By learning to stand in other people's shoes, one becomes more empathetic and receptive to new and different points of view and opinions over time. For inmates, this is an excellent reflective tool to review the actions of others, as well as self, rather than just believing in and accepting the worst of self and others.

FIGURE 27-7a and b Marriage conflict.

How to Effect the Change?

Armed with a portfolio of TOC TP tools, we set to work in planning the curriculum. Time was the major constraint at this juncture as we had exactly one month to complete our due diligence and develop the course materials. At the same time, we were faced with the problem of how to train such a diverse audience. While the tools themselves were generic enough to address individual needs, we did not have the luxury of working one-on-one so we needed to redevelop the training materials to address all learning capabilities within a classroom environment. Anyone who has worked with such a heterogeneous audience will understand the enormity of this task. The main areas to address were marketing, course materials, and delivery.